cobalt

Cobalt is an essential element in today’s lithium ion batteries. But where does it come from? According to Amnesty International, 50% of the world supply comes from the Democratic Republic of Congo.

No one should be surprised to learn the global economy permits many abusive procedures that endanger the health and dignity of those at the bottom of the economic structure. Companies like Apple have gotten bad press for the labor practices of Foxconn, a company that assembles electronic products for many of the world’s leading tech companies. It burst into the headlines after 14 people who worked at a Foxconn factory in the Chinese city of Shenzhen committed suicide.

In a new report dated January 18 and entitled This is What We Die For: Human Rights Abuses in the Democratic Republic of the Congo Power the Global Trade in Cobalt, Amnesty International details the arduous, dangerous, and unhealthy conditions at the cobalt mines in the DCR. During its investigation, it discovered that children as young as 7 were working in the mines with no protective clothing for up to 24 hours at a time. “The glamorous shop displays and marketing of state of the art technologies are a stark contrast to the children carrying bags of rocks, and miners in narrow manmade tunnels risking permanent lung damage,” said Mark Dummett, Business & Human Rights Researcher at Amnesty International.

According to the report, traders buy cobalt from areas in the DRC where child labor is commonplace and sell it to Congo Dongfang Mining (CDM), a wholly owned subsidiary of Chinese mineral company Zhejiang Huayou Cobalt Ltd (Huayou Cobalt). Huayou Cobalt and CDM process the cobalt before selling it to three battery component manufacturers, Ningbo Shanshan and Tianjin Bamo in China and L&F Materials in South Korea. Those three companies then sell the processed material to battery makers who say they supply technology and car companies, including Apple, Microsoft, Samsung, Sony, Daimler and Volkswagen.

“It is a major paradox of the digital era that some of the world’s richest, most innovative companies are able to market incredibly sophisticated devices without being required to show where they source raw materials for their components,” said Emmanuel Umpula, executive director of Afrewatch. “The abuses in mines remain out of sight and out of mind because in today’s global marketplace, consumers have no idea about the conditions at the mine, factory, and assembly line. We found that traders are buying cobalt without asking questions about how and where it was mined.”

“Many of these multinationals say they have a zero tolerance policy for child labor. But this promise is not worth the paper it is written when the companies are not investigating their suppliers. Their claim is simply not credible,” says AI’s Dummett. “Without laws that require companies to check and publicly disclose information about where they source minerals and their suppliers, companies can continue to benefit from human rights abuses. Governments must put an end to this lack of transparency, which allows companies to profit from misery.”

Both Amnesty International and Afrewatch are asking companies that use lithium ion batteries in their products to do their human rights due diligence, investigate whether the cobalt is extracted under hazardous conditions or with child labor, and be more transparent about their suppliers. Most of the companies contacted by AI said they had no idea where their cobalt comes from. Of course, they have done nothing to find out, either.

Ultimately, it is not up to corporations to protect the weak and the powerless. It is the duty of consumers to insist that the products they buy do not result from the exploitation of human laborers. If you wish to know more about this subject, you can learn a great deal from Naomi Klein’s well documented research in her ground breaking book No Logo.

Imagine a lithium-ion battery that packs 7 times more energy per kilogram than any battery available today. How would that change the future of electric vehicles?

Just last week, we reported on a conversation with Mitsuhisa Kato, Toyota’s head of research and development, who complains that the batteries available today are simply not good enough to make EV’s a credible choice for most buyers. Kato said it will take a “Nobel Prize winning battery” before EV’s go mainstream. Toyota, Honda and the Japanese government have made a major commitment to hydrogen fuel cell cars instead.

This week a research team at the University of Tokyo School of Engineering has announced a new lithium ion battery that packs seven times more energy density – at 2,570 watt-hours per kilogram – than current lithium ion batteries. The team, led by Professor Noritaka Mizuno, adds cobalt to the lithium oxide crystal structure of the positive electrode, which promotes the creation of oxides and peroxides during the charge/discharge cycle. In addition, it promises significantly faster recharge times as well.

Isn’t it ironic that the “Nobel battery” Toyota’s Kato referred to may have been invented by a team of Japanese scientists? For a more detailed technical explanation of the of the new battery, see the report first published in Nikkei Technology.

Of course, this breakthrough is still in the experimental stage. Energy dense lithium ion batteries will not be on the shelf at WalMart any time soon. But if the claims for the new battery prove valid, expect to see the struggle between EV’s and FCV tilt sharply in favor of electric vehicles. Now the range for the new Porsche Cayenne PHEV could be 112 miles instead of 16, and that shiny new Nissan LEAF could go over 500 miles on a full charge instead of just 73. And the Tesla Model S would be able to drive some 1,855 miles before needing to be plugged in.

Maybe now would be a good time for the folks at the University of Tokyo School of Engineering to find space for that Nobel Prize?

Thanks to the folks at Visual Capitalist, we now have a detailed infographic showing exactly how Tesla’s $5 billion dollar Gigafactory will operate and the effect it will have on raw materials costs. The United Bank of Scotland estimates that raw materials – primarily cobalt, graphite and lithium – account for 70% of the cost of an EV battery. In turn, the battery is by far the most costly component of any EV.

If the cost of the battery can be reduced, the car it goes into will cost less. Tesla estimates its Gigafactory, which will produce as many batteries in one year as were manufactured in the entire world in 2013, will drive down the cost of EV batteries by 30% thanks to economies of scale.

The factory will create 6500 high- tech jobs when it opens, which is why at least five different states are courting the electric automaker. Most importantly though, the Gigafactory will permit Tesla to price its forthcoming Model III at around $35,000. The Model S currently starts $69,900, but often sells for closer to $100,000 thanks to a myriad of luxury features and options.

To see how Elon Musk’s vision for the Gigafactory works from an economic standpoint, scroll through the infographic below.

In America, November is a month of thanks- and I have a lot to be thankful for this year. One of those things is the fact that GM decided to let me drive a 2014 Chevy Cruze Diesel from Oak Park, Illinois to Wellington, Ohio to visit friends and family over the Thanksgiving weekend. All I had to do in return is let you, dear readers, know what I thought of the thing. SO, sit back and get ready, because this is going to be a weird one.

1. the Chevy Cruze Diesel is a Quality Car

More than anything else, what struck me most about this latest Chevy CavalierCobalt Cruze was how well-built everything is compared to Chevy compacts of yore. Even compared to my 2009 Malibu mild-hybrid, the doors shut with the same sturdy “whoomp” you’d only get from Mercedes’ doors a generation ago. Beyond that, everything feels over-built- from the full-opening rubber door seals to the heavy hood to the beefy door-handles. I loved all of it, and it definitely gave me the impression that I could expect to get 200,000 plus miles of loyal service from the little sedan.

On top of the “quality feel” of the components, the 2014 Chevy Cruze Diesel had instruments that were easy to read and almost everything was, generally, easy to set and adjust. I say “almost” everything, though, because of this …

Did I say I hated it? I don’t hate the Chevy MyLink’s bizarre mix of touch-screen and button-driven menus, I loathe it. I despise it. I am against everything the people who made it stand for, sure- but I don’t hate it. What I hate is everyone at GM who decided that MyLink should be a thing in the first place. Surrounded by quality sheet metal, soft leather, and legitimately slick gear head tech (more on that, in a moment), the MyLink system seemed cheap and out-dated, leading me to ask, for the thousandth time, why automakers don’t just build a quality iPad dock into their dashboard and work with Apple (or HTC, or whoever) to get the drivers right. There is simply no reason for GM (or Ford, or any other car-maker) to be in the OS/GUI space, and MyLink is a vivid example of why that’s a fact.

If I’m being 100% honest, however- I did find a way to make the MyLink system do exactly what I wanted: I used OnStar.

OnStar continues to be the biggest and best selling point for GM vehicles. GM were mad- MAD, I tell you!- to ever let that slip into the hands of their competitors. When I pressed the button, I was greeted at 4AM, on Thanksgiving morning, by a cheerful OnStar agent who set my GPS, found me an XM station, and popped the trunk for me while I was fumbling around looking for an in-car trunk release (which I never did find, by the way).

2. the Chevy Cruze Diesel is Full of Racy Tech

The 2014 Cruze I drove was packed with racy, gear head tech. From active aerodynamic shutters that closed at speed to reduce the car’s drag to the 2.0 L Ecotec diesel that, once I figured out where to shift, gave back more than adequate performance and acceleration. All that tech, including the traction control and anti-lock brakes, was nearly invisible from the driver’s seat. Perfect, in other words.

3. the Chevy Cruze Diesel’s MPG is Amazing

I’ve made the drive from Oak Park, IL to Oberlin, OH more times than I can count by now, and I know just about every exit on the 335-ish mile trip. Let me tell you that, despite doing the math, I wasn’t mentally prepared to make the entire trip on half a tank of gas. I was, in fact, blown away by the idea that I could drive from Chicago to Cleveland and back on a single tank of gas.

That kind of range, combined with solid build quality, is what EVs are up against. It’s not about whether or not electric cars are going to displace gasoline-powered cars, it’s about what EVs can offer over cars like the Chevy Cruze diesel. This is the future of middle America, guys: diesel.

4. the Chevy Cruze Diesel Should be a Buick

Besides the hateful MyLink system, there was something else about the Cruze that upset me. In fact, for the entirety of the five days I was in the car, I kept finding myself staring at it …

… the passenger door panel didn’t seem to line up with the dashboard. It’s a problem, sure, but it’s one that I was willing to forgive. After all, the 2014 Chevy Cruze diesel was fast, relatively comfortable, packed with features- did I mention the doors shut like my dad’s old Mercedes SL?

I was willing to let it go, is what I’m saying. That is, until I had the following conversation about 100 miles into Indiana:

Me: Doesn’t that bother you?

Wife: Doesn’t what bother me?

Me: Your door. It doesn’t fit right.

Wife: It’s fine.

Me: No. No, it’s not. You don’t see that in the little Voklswagen wagons, and that’s what this car is supposed to be competing against.

Wife: I could see it competing with the Volkswagens.

Me: Yeah?

Wife: I like the big screen. I like the OnStar. I like the Nav. I feel like it’s safe.

Me: I thought you hated diesels?

Wife: I can’t really tell it’s a diesel. It’s fine. I could see you buying one of these, if it was a wagon. (Are you listening, GM!?)

Me: They make a wagon.

Wife: How much is it?

Me: I don’t know. The GM guy left me a folder that has the window sticker in it. It’s on your side. What does it say?

Wife: $28,000.

That’s right, kids. GM is asking twenty and eight thousand US American dollars for its 2014 Chevy Cruze diesel sedan – and that seems utterly unbelievable to me. That price, by the way, is $1000 more than the Volkswagen Jetta TDi with all the same goodies, plus a 6-way power driver’s seat, a sunroof, push-button starter (it’s a thing), and the all-important VW badge on the front of the car.

It seems to me that GM has a problem with the Cruze diesel. They’ve built a car that’s capable of going toe-to-toe with a premium competitor, but they’ve stuck the wrong badge on the nose. The truth is that this engine placed in Buick’s baby Verano (which is based on the same platform as the Cruze) could demand a $30K OTD price without anyone batting an eyelash.

Granted, you could make a case that Buick doesn’t appeal to millenials and that Chevy is trying to re-establish itself as a brand that young professionals would consider shopping, but that would be a ridiculous, crap argument. There is no reason to believe that putting the 2.0 L Ecotec turbodiesel engine in a Verano would hurt Chevy’s Cruze sales, and there are plenty of reasons to believe that a diesel offering in a compact Buick would give that brand an edge in the entry-luxe Acura/Lexus/Volvo field that Buick plays in.

So, would I buy a $28,000 Chevy Cruze? If it was a wagon, maybe. As a sedan? Not a chance- but I would recommend the car to, say, my in-laws. It’s a great little car, then, but not for me.

The Holy Grail of alternative fuels is the hydrogen fuel cell, a literal zero-emissions vehicle that requires expensive and rare platinum as a reaction catalyst. This makes hydrogen fuel cells incredibly costly, but researchers at Brown University have developed a cheaper and more durable alternative that is the best replacement for platinum yet.

With the help of his students, chemist Shouheng Sun developed this new catalyst. This alternative to platinum uses readily-available cobalt and graphene sheets, which is a single-atom thick layer of carbon atoms arranged in a honeycomb pattern. While the reaction took longer for the oxygen to separate the electrons from the hydrogen fuel, one the reaction gets going it is actually faster than platinum. This stripping of electrons produces the electric current needed to power the batteries of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles. T

While this isn’t the only project aimed at reducing hydrogen fuel cell costs, it is the best one developed so far. The cobalt-graphene catalyst isn’t quite ready for prime time but preliminary tests are promising. In addition to being cheaper, the cobalt-graphene reaction is more durable as well. Sun found that after 17 hours of testing, the cobalt-graphene catalyst still operated at 70% its original capacity, while platinum had fallen to 60%.

Honda has announced a new joint project with Japan Metals and Chemicals (JMC) Co., Ltd. – a mass production line for a recycling plant. But it’s not just any mass production line; it’s the world’s first massive hybrid battery recycling project.

The availability of rare earth metals is a question of limited resources – there’s a finite amount of each element on Earth and it’s also not really that easy to dig out of the ground and refine. China has the monopoly on that market for the moment, prompting Siemens to start a research project last year to recycle old electric motors. Now, Honda wants in on the fun.

What Do You Mean, Unrecyclable Battery?

Most previous attempts at recycling the nickel-metal hydride (Ni-MH) batteries used in most hybrid cars involved heat treatment and treating the nickel-containing results as stainless steel scrap metal. The technology used at the JMC plant has successfully managed to extract the rare earth metal from the batteries in question for reuse; the recovered metal is equivalent in purity to that mined and refined in China.

Not only is the metal recovered of a very usable level of purity, but Honda and JMC have been able to extract upwards of 80% of the rare earth metals put in the battery in the first place. Honda plans to use their fabulous new resource (gathered from both domestic and international dealers) to not only make new batteries but a wide range of other products as well. Check out the diagram for how it works:

The technology in question is apparently also useful not only for nickel-metal hydride compounds but other rare earth metals as well, giving Honda and its mass production line recycling process a significant advantage in maintaining its rare earth metal supply.

Automakers and battery chemists the world over are searching for a solution posed by electric vehicles; how do you store enough electric power to move 3,000+ pounds of automobile while keeping the car affordable? California-based Envia is claiming that their unique lithium-ion battery technology results in a three-fold increase in energy density, while cutting the cost of batteries in half.

According to Envia’s chairman and chief executive Atul Kapadia, their proprietary cathode, anode, and electrolyte technology. The New York Times article does not delve into detail, only noting that Envia uses a maganese-rich powder as the battery cathodes. Many modern batteries use cobalt, aluminum, and other high-value rare-earth metals in their batteries. This drives the cost of batteries to $400 per kWh and beyond.

Envia’s breakthrough claims a cost of just $150 per kWh. Tesla CEO Elon Musk believes that a sub $200 per-kWh battery is due for the near future…though I doubt he expected it to be so soon. Envia claims that this is not some experiment, but a working product that could come to market in the next 18 months.

Envia’s research was funded by the venture-capital arm of General Motors, GM Ventures, which may mean that GM would get first dibs on this “breakthrough” technology. This technology could cut the cost of batteries in half, which alone would make EV’s more palatable to a larger segment of the population. But in addition, this technology can store three-times as much energy as current battery pack technology, which could yield as much as 300 miles of driving range.

Imagine, if you will, a Nissan Leaf that cost just $30,000 without government subsidies, while delivering 300 miles of range per-charge. I’m usually skepticial about such “breakthrough” claims, but I figure with all the money going into battery research, somebody is going to “crack the code” of battery technology, as it were. Might that somebody be Envia?

Until electric vehicles can provide the same range and convenience as today’s gas-powered automobiles, they will not find much of a mass market. UK-based Axeon has announced that their new battery pack could extend EV range by as much as 35% when compared with a lithium-ion pack of the same size.

The Axeon battery pack uses Nickel Cobalt Maganese electrochemistry, rather than the standard lithium-ion phosphate chemistry that is popular in today’s EV’s and hybrids. Theoretically, the NCM setup would also be 50% smaller and 30% lighter, which would be a huge boon to weight-sensitive EV’s.

Right now Axeon is looking for a demonstrator car to plug their new pack into. This isn’t the first big battery breakthrough we’ve heard of, and it isn’t likely to be the last. But if Axeon can verify these claims, NCM batteries may replace lithium-ion batteries sooner, rather than later.

Chris DeMorro is a writer and gearhead who loves all things automotive, from hybrids to HEMIs. You can read about his slow descent into madness at Sublime Burnout or follow his non-nonsensical ramblings on Twitter @harshcougar.

The scale of the mountain pine beetle’s destruction of Western North American forests is almost unimaginable. Already more than half of the 5 million acres of lodgepole pine forests in Colorado have been destroyed, and 10’s of millions more acres across the Western U.S. and Canada are affected — with an estimated 40 million acres of lodgepole pine devastation in British Columbia alone.

While this is a sad state of affairs — we could be witnessing the end of the western lodgepole pine forest as we know it — the huge amounts of dead wood left in the beetle’s path of destruction are finding a happy end as a source for renewable fuel.

In a breakthrough that might change a few minds about the battery-swap concept, Nissan says that they have succeeded in tests that would extend the range of the LEAF and other electric cars up to 186 miles on each charge, almost double today’s range with an improved battery.

Nissan has developed a new battery combination by adding small amounts of cobalt and nickel to the manganese in their current batteries. Now it’s a real mouthful: a lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxide cathode battery, or NMC.

Featured Motorcycle Posts

Advertisement

The content produced by this site is for entertainment purposes only. Opinions and comments published on this site may not be sanctioned by, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sustainable Enterprises Media, Inc., its owners, sponsors, affiliates, or subsidiaries.

The content produced by this site is for entertainment purposes only. Opinions and comments published on this site may not be sanctioned by, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sustainable Enterprises Media, Inc., its owners, sponsors, affiliates, or subsidiaries.